So what other scientific material should be censored on the chance that a child MIGHT be present…

I agree with you. I don’t believe the societal pressures the university believed they could get backlash from should be legitimized with action. People get offended by everything under the sun all the time, and frankly I don’t know where we should draw the line. It would be easier if people just kept an open mind about all ideas, positions, images, issues, etc. but unfortunately society’s expectations of people to keep an open mind have been met with illegitimate backlash.

My reply was only to describe that the intentions of the administration was not an attack on women’s health. I was presenting the point of view of the administration which was purposely left out of this editorial to grab attention and enrage people with insinuation.

I self-ascribe as an intersectional feminist and I believe this piece undermines the feminist movement by trying to insinuate the motivations for this action as “to de-prioritize women’s issues and women’s health.” It takes legitimacy away from cases where this actually happens. If an image of the anatomy of a penis and testicles were presented instead in this research, then the administration would have come to the same conclusion.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.